Mesenchymal stem/stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) are considered a promising therapeutic tool in cell therapy due to their immunomodulatory, regenerative and angiogenic capabilities. However, there is a lack of process knowledge, particularly for a large-scale production of MSC-EV using fully controlled stirred tank bioreactor (STR) systems. For the establishment of a STR-based process, we investigated dynamic process set-ups in spinner flasks, using three different microcarriers, as well as in shaking flasks, using microcarrier-free spheroids. An immortalized cell line (hMSC-TERT) and a particle-free chemically defined medium was used for all approaches. Cell characteristics (e.g., growth, metabolism, cell-specific particle production rates), MSC-EV epitope markers and MSC-EV potency in migration assays were analyzed. We showed that the transfer to a dynamic system (non-porous microcarrier, spinner flask) significantly increased the cell-specific particle production rate (6-fold) and the expression of EV-specific markers. Moreover, MSC proliferation and, most importantly, the therapeutic potency of MSC-derived particles including EVs was maintained. We demonstrated that high cell-specific particle production rates were associated with an increased glucose consumption rate rather than cell growth, which can be utilized for future process development. Furthermore, we showed that dynamic conditions of a controlled 1 L STR significantly increased the cell-specific particle production rate (24-fold) as well as the final concentration (3-fold) of potent MSC-derived particles including EVs. This indicates that fully controlled STRs are an efficient production system for MSC-derived particles including EVs that may open and facilitate the path for clinical applications.
Citation: Jan Barekzai, Jonas Friedrich, Maduwuike Okpara, Laura Refflinghaus, Dustin Eckhardt, Peter Czermak, Denise Salzig. Dynamic expansion of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells in a stirred tank bioreactor promotes the release of potent extracellular vesicles[J]. AIMS Bioengineering, 2023, 10(3): 240-264. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2023016
[1] | Siting Yu, Jingjing Peng, Zengao Tang, Zhenyun Peng . Iterative methods to solve the constrained Sylvester equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 21531-21553. doi: 10.3934/math.20231097 |
[2] | Nunthakarn Boonruangkan, Pattrawut Chansangiam . Convergence analysis of a gradient iterative algorithm with optimal convergence factor for a generalized Sylvester-transpose matrix equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(8): 8477-8496. doi: 10.3934/math.2021492 |
[3] | Jin-Song Xiong . Generalized accelerated AOR splitting iterative method for generalized saddle point problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 7625-7641. doi: 10.3934/math.2022428 |
[4] | Jiaxin Lan, Jingpin Huang, Yun Wang . An E-extra iteration method for solving reduced biquaternion matrix equation AX+XB=C. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 17578-17589. doi: 10.3934/math.2024854 |
[5] | Kanjanaporn Tansri, Pattrawut Chansangiam . Gradient-descent iterative algorithm for solving exact and weighted least-squares solutions of rectangular linear systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 11781-11798. doi: 10.3934/math.2023596 |
[6] | Yinlan Chen, Min Zeng, Ranran Fan, Yongxin Yuan . The solutions of two classes of dual matrix equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 23016-23031. doi: 10.3934/math.20231171 |
[7] | Wenxiu Guo, Xiaoping Lu, Hua Zheng . A two-step iteration method for solving vertical nonlinear complementarity problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 14358-14375. doi: 10.3934/math.2024698 |
[8] | Wen-Ning Sun, Mei Qin . On maximum residual block Kaczmarz method for solving large consistent linear systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 33843-33860. doi: 10.3934/math.20241614 |
[9] | Kanjanaporn Tansri, Sarawanee Choomklang, Pattrawut Chansangiam . Conjugate gradient algorithm for consistent generalized Sylvester-transpose matrix equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 5386-5407. doi: 10.3934/math.2022299 |
[10] | Yang Cao, Quan Shi, Sen-Lai Zhu . A relaxed generalized Newton iteration method for generalized absolute value equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(2): 1258-1275. doi: 10.3934/math.2021078 |
Mesenchymal stem/stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) are considered a promising therapeutic tool in cell therapy due to their immunomodulatory, regenerative and angiogenic capabilities. However, there is a lack of process knowledge, particularly for a large-scale production of MSC-EV using fully controlled stirred tank bioreactor (STR) systems. For the establishment of a STR-based process, we investigated dynamic process set-ups in spinner flasks, using three different microcarriers, as well as in shaking flasks, using microcarrier-free spheroids. An immortalized cell line (hMSC-TERT) and a particle-free chemically defined medium was used for all approaches. Cell characteristics (e.g., growth, metabolism, cell-specific particle production rates), MSC-EV epitope markers and MSC-EV potency in migration assays were analyzed. We showed that the transfer to a dynamic system (non-porous microcarrier, spinner flask) significantly increased the cell-specific particle production rate (6-fold) and the expression of EV-specific markers. Moreover, MSC proliferation and, most importantly, the therapeutic potency of MSC-derived particles including EVs was maintained. We demonstrated that high cell-specific particle production rates were associated with an increased glucose consumption rate rather than cell growth, which can be utilized for future process development. Furthermore, we showed that dynamic conditions of a controlled 1 L STR significantly increased the cell-specific particle production rate (24-fold) as well as the final concentration (3-fold) of potent MSC-derived particles including EVs. This indicates that fully controlled STRs are an efficient production system for MSC-derived particles including EVs that may open and facilitate the path for clinical applications.
Fractional calculus deals with the equations which involve integrals and derivatives of fractional orders. The history of fractional calculus begins from the history of calculus. The role of fractional integral operators is very vital in the applications of this subject in other fields. Several well known phenomenas and their solutions are presented in fractional calculus which can not be studied in ordinary calculus. Inequalities are useful tools in mathematical modelling of real world problems, they also appear as constraints to initial/boundary value problems. Fractional integral/derivative inequalities are of great importance in the study of fractional differential models and fractional dynamical systems. In recent years study of fractional integral/derivative inequalities accelerate very fastly. Many well known classical inequalities have been generalized by using classical and newly defined integral operators in fractional calculus. For some recent work on fractional integral inequalities we refer the readers to [1,2,3,4,5,6] and references therein.
Our goal in this paper is to apply generalize Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals using a monotonically increasing function. The Hadamard inequalities are proved for these integral operators using strongly (α,m)-convex functions. Also error bounds of well known Hadamard inequalities are obtained by using two fractional integral identities. In connection with the results of this paper, we give generalizations and refinements of some well known results added recently in the literature of mathematical inequalities.
Next, we like to give some definitions and established results which are necessary and directly associated with the findings of this paper.
Definition 1. [7] A function f:[0,+∞)→R is said to be strongly (α,m)-convex function with modulus c≥0, where (α,m)∈[0,1]2, if
f(xt+m(1−t)y)≤tαf(x)+m(1−tα)f(y)−cmtα(1−tα)|y−x|2, | (1.1) |
holds ∀x,y∈[0,+∞) and t∈[0,1].
The well-known Hadamard inequality is a very nice geometrical interpretation of convex functions defined on the real line, it is stated as follows:
Theorem 1. The following inequality holds:
f(x+y2)≤1y−x∫yxf(v)dv≤f(x)+f(y)2, | (1.2) |
for convex function f:I→R, where I is an interval and x,y∈I, x<y.
The definition of Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals is given as follows:
Definition 2. Let f∈L1[a,b]. Then left-sided and right-sided Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals of a function f of order μ where ℜ(μ)>0 are defined by
Iμa+f(x)=1Γ(μ)∫xa(x−t)μ−1f(t)dt,x>a, | (1.3) |
and
Iμb−f(x)=1Γ(μ)∫bx(t−x)μ−1f(t)dt,x<b. | (1.4) |
The following theorems provide two Riemann-Liouville fractional versions of the Hadamard inequality for convex functions.
Theorem 2. [8] Let f:[a,b]→R be a positive function with 0≤a<b and f∈L1[a,b]. If f is a convex function on [a,b], then the following fractional integral inequality holds:
f(a+b2)≤Γ(μ+1)2(b−a)μ[Iμa+f(b)+Iμb−f(a)]≤f(a)+f(b)2, | (1.5) |
with μ>0.
Theorem 3. [9] Under the assumption of Theorem 2, the following fractional integral inequality holds:
f(a+b2)≤2μ−1Γ(μ+1)(b−a)μ[Iμ(a+b2)+f(b)+Iμ(a+b2)−f(a)]≤f(a)+f(b)2, | (1.6) |
with μ>0.
Theorem 4. [8] Let f:[a,b]→R be a differentiable mapping on (a,b) with a<b. If |f′| is convex on [a,b], then the following fractional integral inequality holds:
|f(a)+f(b)2−Γ(μ+1)2(b−a)μ[Iμa+f(b)+Iμb−f(a)]|≤b−a2(μ+1)(1−12μ)[|f′(a)|+|f′(b)|]. | (1.7) |
The k-analogue of Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals is defined as follows:
Definition 3. [10] Let f∈L1[a,b]. Then k-fractional Riemann-Liouville integrals of order μ where ℜ(μ)>0, k>0, are defined by
kIμa+f(x)=1kΓk(μ)∫xa(x−t)μk−1f(t)dt,x>a, | (1.8) |
and
kIμb−f(x)=1kΓk(μ)∫bx(t−x)μk−1f(t)dt,x<b, | (1.9) |
where Γk(.) is defined as [11]
Γk(μ)=∫∞0tμ−1e−tkkdt. |
The k-fractional versions of Hadamard type inequalities (1.5)–(1.7) are given in the following theorems.
Theorem 5. [12] Let f:[a,b]→R be a positive function with 0≤a<b. If f is a convex function on [a,b], then the following inequalities for k-fractional integrals hold:
f(a+b2)≤Γk(μ+k)2(b−a)μk[kIμa+f(b)+kIμb−f(a)]≤f(a)+f(b)2. | (1.10) |
Theorem 6. [13] Under the assumption of Theorem 5, the following fractional integral inequality holds:
f(a+b2)≤2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(b−a)μk[kIμ(a+b2)+f(b)+kIμ(a+b2)−f(a)]≤f(a)+f(b)2. | (1.11) |
Theorem 7. [12] Let f:[a,b]→R be a differentiable mapping on (a,b) with 0≤a<b. If |f′| is convex on [a,b], then the following inequality for k-fractional integrals holds:
|f(a)+f(b)2−Γk(μ+k)2(b−a)μk[kIμa+f(b)+kIμb−f(a)]|≤b−a2(μk+1)(1−12μk)[|f′(a)|+|f′(b)|]. | (1.12) |
In the following, we give the definition of generalized Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals by a monotonically increasing function.
Definition 4. [14] Let f∈L1[a,b]. Also let ψ be an increasing and positive monotone function on (a,b], having a continuous derivative ψ′ on (a,b). The left-sided and right-sided fractional integrals of a function f with respect to another function ψ on [a,b] of order μ where ℜ(μ)>0 are defined by
Iμ,ψa+f(x)=1Γ(μ)∫xaψ′(t)(ψ(x)−ψ(t))μ−1f(t)dt,x>a, | (1.13) |
and
Iμ,ψb−f(x)=1Γ(μ)∫bxψ′(t)(ψ(t)−ψ(x))μ−1f(t)dt,x<b. | (1.14) |
The k-analogue of generalized Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals is defined as follows:
Definition 5 [4] Let f∈L1[a,b]. Also let ψ be an increasing and positive monotone function on (a,b], having a continuous derivative ψ′ on (a,b). The left-sided and right-sided fractional integrals of a function f with respect to another function ψ on [a,b] of order μ where ℜ(μ)>0, k>0, are defined by
kIμ,ψa+f(x)=1kΓk(μ)∫xaψ′(t)(ψ(x)−ψ(t))μk−1f(t)dt,x>a, | (1.15) |
and
kIμ,ψb−f(x)=1kΓk(μ)∫bxψ′(t)(ψ(t)−ψ(x))μk−1f(t)dt,x<b. | (1.16) |
For more details of above defined fractional integrals, we refer the readers to see [15,16].
Rest of the paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, we find Hadamard type inequalities for generalized Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals with the help of strongly (α,m)-convex functions. The consequences of these inequalities are listed in remarks. Also some new fractional integral inequalities for convex functions, strongly convex functions and strongly m-convex functions are deduced in the form of corollaries. In Section 3, the error bounds of Hadamard type fractional inequalities are established via two fractional integral identities.
Theorem 8. Let f:[a,b]→R be a positive function with 0≤a<mb and f∈L1[a,b]. Also suppose that f is strongly (α,m)-convex function on [a,b] with modulus c≥0, ψ is positive strictly increasing function having continuous derivative ψ′ on (a,b). If [a,b]⊂Range(ψ), k>0 and (α,m)∈(0,1]2, then the following k-fractional integral inequality holds:
f(a+mb2)+cm(2α−1)22α(μ+k)(μ+2k)[μ(μ+k)(b−a)2+2k2(am−mb)2+2μk(b−a)(am−mb)]≤Γk(μ+k)2α(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+(2α−1)mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(b)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]≤[f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b)]μ2α(μ+kα)+mkαμ(f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2))2α(μ2+μαk)−cmkαμ[(b−a)2+m(2α−1)(b−am2)2]2α(μ+αk)(μ+2αk), | (2.1) |
with μ>0.
Proof. Since f is strongly (α,m)-convex function, for x,y∈[a,b] we have
f(x+my2)≤f(x)+m(2α−1)f(y)2α−cm(2α−1)|y−x|222α. | (2.2) |
By setting x=at+m(1−t)b, y=am(1−t)+bt and integrating the resulting inequality after multiplying with tμk−1, we get
kμf(a+mb2)≤12α[∫10f(at+m(1−t)b)tμk−1dt+m(2α−1)∫10f(am(1−t)+bt)tμk−1dt]−cm(2α−1)22αμ(μ+k)(μ+2k)[μk(μ+k)(b−a)2+2k3(am−mb)2+2k2μ(b−a)(am−mb)]. | (2.3) |
Now, let u∈[a,b] such that ψ(u)=at+m(1−t)b, that is, t=mb−ψ(u)mb−a and let v∈[a,b] such that ψ(v)=am(1−t)+bt, that is, t=ψ(v)−amb−am in (2.3), then multiplying μk after applying Definition 5, we get the following inequality:
f(a+mb2)≤Γk(μ+k)2α(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1(2α−1)kIμ,ψψ−1(b)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−cm(2α−1)22α(μ+k)(μ+2k)[μ(b−a)2+2k2(am−mb)2+2μk(b−a)(am−mb)]. | (2.4) |
Hence by rearranging the terms, the first inequality is established. On the other hand, f is strongly (α,m)-convex function, for t∈[0,1], we have the following inequality:
f(at+m(1−t)b)+m(2α−1)f(am(1−t)+bt)≤tα[f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b)]+m(1−tα)[f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2)]−cmtα(1−tα)[(b−a)2+m(2α−1)(b−am2)2]. | (2.5) |
Multiplying inequality (2.5) with tμk−1 on both sides and then integrating over the interval [0,1], we get
∫10tμk−1f(ta+m(1−t)b)dt+m(2α−1)∫10tμk−1f(am(1−t)+tb)dt≤(f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b))(kμ+kα)+m(f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2))k2αμ2+μαk−cmαk2[(b−a)2+m(2α−1)(b−am2)2](μ+αk)(μ+2αk). | (2.6) |
Again taking ψ(u)=at+m(1−t)b that is t=mb−ψ(u)mb−a and ψ(v)=am(1−t)+bt that is t=ψ(v)−amb−am in (2.6), then by applying Definition 5, the second inequality can be obtained.
Remark 1. Under the assumption of Theorem 8, by fixing parameters one can achieve the following outcomes:
(i) If α=m=1 in (2.1), then the inequality stated in [17,Theorem 9] can be obtained.
(ii) If α=m=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (2.1), then Theorem 5 can be obtained.
(iii) If α=k=m=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (2.1), then Theorem 2 can be obtained.
(iv) If α=k=m=1 and ψ=I in (2.1), then the inequality stated in [18,Theorem 2.1] can be obtained.
(v) If α=μ=k=m=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (2.1), then the Hadamard inequality can be obtained.
(vi) If α=m=1 and c=0 in (2.1), then the inequality stated in [19,Theorem 1] can be obtained.
(vii) If α=m=k=1 and c=0 in (2.1), then the inequality stated in [20,Theorem 2.1] can be obtained.
(viii) If α=k=1 and ψ=I in (2.1), then the inequality stated in [21,Theorem 6] can be obtained.
(ix) If α=μ=m=k=1 and ψ=I in (2.1), then the inequality stated in [22,Theorem 6] can be obtained.
(x) If α=k=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (2.1), then the inequality stated in [23,Theorem 2.1] can be obtained.
(xi) If k=1 and ψ=I in (2.1), then the inequality stated in [24,Theorem 4] can be obtained.
Corollary 1. Under the assumption of Theorem 8 with c=0 in (2.1), the following fractional integral inequality holds:
f(a+mb2)≤Γk(μ+k)2α(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+(2α−1)mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(b)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]≤[f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b)]μ2α(μ+kα)+mμαk(f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2))2α(μ2+μαk). |
Corollary 2. Under the assumption of Theorem 8 with k=1 in (2.1), the following fractional integral inequality holds:
f(a+mb2)+cmμ(2α−1)22αμ(μ+1)(μ+2)[μ(μ+1)(b−a)2+2(am−mb)2+2μ(b−a)(am−mb)]≤Γ(μ+1)2α(mb−a)μ[Iμ,ψψ−1(a)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+(2α−1)mμ+1Iμ,ψψ−1(b)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]≤[f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b)]μ2α(μ+α)+m(f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2))αμ2α(μ2+μα)−cmαμ[(b−a)2+m(2α−1)(b−am2)2]2α(μ+α)(μ+2α). |
Corollary 3. Under the assumption of Theorem 8 with ψ=I in (2.1), the following fractional integral inequality holds:
f(a+mb2)+cm(2α−1)22α(μ+k)(μ+2k)[μ(μ+k)(b−a)2+2k2(am−mb)2+2μk(b−a)(am−mb)]≤Γk(μ+k)2α(mb−a)μk[kIμa+f(mb)+(2α−1)mμk+1kIμb−f(am)]≤[f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b)]μ2α(μ+kα)+mkαμ(f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2))2α(μ2+μαk)−cmkαμ[(b−a)2+m(2α−1)(b−am2)2]2α(μ+αk)(μ+2αk). |
Theorem 9. Under the assumption of Theorem 8, the following k-fractional integral inequality holds:
f(a+mb2)+cmμ(2α−1)22α+2(μ+2k)[μ(μ+k)(b−a)2+(am−mb)2(μ2+5kμ+8k2)+2μ(μ+3k)(b−a)×(am−mb)]≤2μk−αΓk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1(2α−1)kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]≤μ[f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b)]22α(αk+μ)+m(2α(μ+αk)−μ)22α(μ+αk)(f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2))−cmμ[2α(μ+2αk)−(μ+αk)]23α(μ+αk)(μ+2αk)((b−a)2+m(b−am2)2), | (2.7) |
with μ>0.
Proof. Let x=at2+m(2−t2)b, y=am(2−t2)+bt2 in (2.2) and integrating the resulting inequality over [0,1] after multiplying with tμk−1, we get
kμf(a+mb2)≤12α[∫10f(at2+m(2−t2)b)tμk−1dt+m(2α−1)∫10f(am(2−t2)+bt2)tμk−1dt]−cm(2α−1)22α+2(μ+2k)[μ(μ+k)(b−a)2k+k(am−mb)2(μ2+5kμ+8k2)+2μ(b−a)(am−mb)(μ+3k)k]. | (2.8) |
Let u∈[a,b], so that ψ(u)=at2+m(2−t2)b, that is, t=2(mb−ψ(u))mb−a and v∈[a,b], so that ψ(v)=am(2−t2)+bt2, that is, t=2(ψ(v)−am)b−am in (2.8), then by applying Definition 5, we get
f(a+mb2)≤2μkΓk(μ+k)2α(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1(2α−1)kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−cmμ(2α−1)22α4(μ+2k)[μ(μ+k)(b−a)2+(am−mb)2(μ2+5kμ+8k2)+2μ(b−a)(am−mb)(μ+3k)]. | (2.9) |
Hence by rearranging terms, the first inequality is established. Since f is strongly (α,m)-convex function with modulus c≥0, for t∈[0,1], we have following inequality
f(at2+m(2−t2)b)+m(2α−1)f(am(2−t2)+bt2)≤(t2)α[f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b)]+m(2α−tα2α)[f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2)]−cmtα(2α−tα)[(b−a)2+m(b−am2)2]22α. | (2.10) |
Multiplying (2.10) with tμk−1 on both sides and integrating over [0,1], we get
∫10f(at2+m(2−t2)b)tμk−1dt+m(2α−1)∫10f(am(2−t2)+bt2)tμk−1dt≤k[f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b)]2α(αk+μ)+mk(2α(μ+αk)−μ)2αμ(μ+αk)(f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2))−cmk(2α(μ+2αk)−(μ+αk))22α((b−a)2+m(b−am2)2). | (2.11) |
Again taking ψ(u)=at2+m(2−t2)b, that is, t=2(mb−ψ(v))mb−a and so that ψ(v)=am(2−t2)+bt2, that is, t=2(ψ(v)−am)b−am in (2.11), then by applying Definition 5, the second inequality can be obtained.
Remark 2. Under the assumption of Theorem 9, one can achieve the following outcomes:
(i) If α=m=1 in (2.7), then the inequality stated in [17,Theorem 10] can be obtained.
(ii) If α=m=k=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (2.7), then Theorem 3 can be obtained.
(iii) If α=μ=m=k=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (2.7), then Hadamard inequality can be obtained.
(iv) If α=m=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (2.7), then the inequality stated in [13,Theorem 2.1] can be obtained.
(v) If α=m=1 and c=0 in (2.7), then the inequality stated in [17,corrollary 5] can be obtained.
(vi) If α=k=1 and ψ=I in (2.7), then the inequality stated in [21,Theorem 7] can be obtained.
(vii) If k=1 and ψ=I in (2.7), then the inequality stated in [24,Theorem 5] can be obtained.
(viii) If α=m=k=1 and c=0 in (2.7), then the inequality stated in [25,Lemma 1] can be obtained.
Corollary 4. Under the assumption of Theorem 9 with c=0 in (2.7), the following fractional integral inequality holds:
f(a+mb2)≤2μk−αΓk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1(2α−1)kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]≤μ[f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b)]22α(αk+μ)+m(2α(μ+αk)−μ)22α(μ+αk)(f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2)). |
Corollary 5. Under the assumption of Theorem 9 with k=1 in (2.7), the following fractional integral inequality holds:
f(a+mb2)+cmμ(2α−1)22α+2(μ+1)(μ+2)[μ(μ+1)(b−a)2+(am−mb)2(μ2+5μ+8)+2μ(μ+3)(b−a)(am−mb)]≤2μ−αΓ(μ+1)(mb−a)μ[Iμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμ+1(2α−1)Iμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]≤μ[f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b)]22α(α+μ)+m[2α(μ+α)−μ]22α(μ+α)(f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2))−cmμ(2α(μ+2α)−(μ+α))23α(μ+α)(μ+2α)×[(b−a)2+m(b−am2)2]. |
Corollary 6. Under the assumption of Theorem 9 with ψ=I in (2.7), the following fractional integral inequality holds:
f(a+mb2)+cmμ(2α−1)22α+2(μ+2k)[μ(μ+k)(b−a)2+(am−mb)2(μ2+5kμ+8k2)+2μ(b−a)(μ+3k)(am−mb)]≤2μk−αΓk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ(a+mb2)+f(mb))+mμk+1(2α−1)kIμ(a+mb2m)−f(am)]≤μ[f(a)+m(2α−1)f(b)]22α(αk+μ)+m(2α(μ+αk)−μ)22α(μ+αk)(f(b)+m(2α−1)f(am2))−cmμ[2α(μ+2αk)−(μ+αk)]23α(μ+αk)(μ+2αk)((b−a)2+m(b−am2)2). |
In this section, we find the error estimations of Hadamard type fractional inequalities for strongly (α,m)-convex functions by using (1.15) and (1.16) that gives the refinements of already proved estimations. The following lemma is useful to prove the next results.
Lemma 1. Let a<b and f:[a,b]→R be a differentiable mapping on (a,b). Also, suppose that f′∈L[a,b], ψ is positive strictly increasing function, having a continuous derivative ψ′ on (a,b). If [a,b]⊂Range(ψ), k>0, then the following identity holds for generalized fractional integral operators:
f(a)+f(b)2−Γk(μ+k)2(b−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(b))+kIμ,ψψ−1(b)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(a)]=b−a2∫10[(1−t)μk−tμk]f′(ta+(1−t)b)dt. | (3.1) |
Proof. We cosider the right hand side of (3.1) as follows:
∫10((1−t)αk−tμk)f′(ta+(1−t)b)dt=∫10(1−t)μk−1f′(ta+(1−t)b)dt−∫10tμk−1f′(ta+(1−t)b)dt=I1−I2 | (3.2) |
Integrating by parts we get
I1=∫10(1−t)μk−1f′(ta+(1−t)b)dt=f(b)b−a−μk(b−a)∫10(1−t)μk−1f(ta+(1−t)b)dt |
We have v∈[a,b] such that ψ(v)=ta+(1−t)b, with this substitution one can have
I1=f(b)b−a−μk(b−a)∫ψ−1(b)ψ−1(a)(ψ(v)−ab−a)μk−1(f∘ψ(v))b−aψ′(v)dv=f(b)b−a−Γk(μ+k)(b−a)μk+1Iμ,ψψ−1(b)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(a)). | (3.3) |
Similarly one can get after a little computation
I2=−f(a)b−a+Γk(μ+k)(b−a)μk+1Iμ,ψψ−1(a)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(b)). | (3.4) |
Using (3.3) and (3.4) in (3.2), (3.1) can be obtained.
Remark 3. (i) If k=1 and ψ=I in (3.1), then the equality stated in [8,Lemma 2] can be obtained.
(ii) For μ=k=1 and ψ=I in (3.1), then the equality stated in [28,Lemma 2.1] can be obtained.
Theorem 10. Let f:[a,b]→R be a differentiable mapping on (a,b) with 0≤a<b. Also suppose that |f′| is strongly (α,m)-convex with modulus c≥0, ψ is positive strictly increasing function having continuous derivative ψ′ on (a,b). If [a,b]⊂Range(ψ), k>0 and (α,m)∈(0,1]2, then the following k-fractional integral inequality holds:
|f(a)+f(b)2−Γk(μ+k)2(b−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(b))+kIμ,ψψ−1(b)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(a))]|≤b−a2[|f′(a)|(2B(12;α+1,μk+1)+1−(12)α+μkα+μk+1−B(α+1,μk+1))+m|f′(bm)|×(2(1−(12)μk)μk+1+(12)1+μk+αμk+1+α−2B(12;α+1,μk+1)−1−(12)1+μk+αμk+1+α+B(α+1,μk+1))−cm(bm−a)22(2B(12;α+1,μk+1)−2α4−α2˜F1(1+2α,−μk,2(1+α);12)+1−(12)μk+αμk+1+α−B(α+1,μk+1)−1−(12)μk+2αμk+1+2α+B(2α+1,μk+1))], | (3.5) |
with μ>0 and 2˜F1(1+2α,−μk,2(1+α);12) is regularized hypergeometric function.
Proof. By Lemma 1, it follows that
|f(a)+f(b)2−Γk(μ+k)2(b−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(b))+kIμ,ψψ−1(b)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(b)]|≤b−a2∫10|(1−t)μk−tμk||f′(ta+(1−t)b|)dt. | (3.6) |
Since |f′| is strongly (α,m)-convex function on [a,b] and t∈[0,1], we have
|f′(ta+(1−t)b)|≤tα|f′(a)|+m(1−tα)|f′(bm)|−cmtα(1−tα)(bm−a)2. | (3.7) |
Therefore (3.6) implies the following inequality
|f(a)+f(b)2−Γk(μ+k)2(b−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(b))+kIμ,ψψ−1(b)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(b)]|≤b−a2∫10|(1−t)μk−tμk|(tα|f′(a)|+m(1−tα)|f′(bm)|−cmtα(1−tα)(bm−a)2]dt≤b−a2[|f′(a)|(∫120tα((1−t)μk−tμk)dt+∫112tα(tμk−(1−t)μk)dt)+m|f′(bm)|(∫120(1−tα)((1−t)μk−tμk)dt+∫112(1−tα)(tμk−(1−t)μk)dt)−cm(bm−a)2(∫120tα(1−tα)((1−t)μk−tμk)dt+∫112tα(1−tα)(tμk−(1−t)μk)dt)]. | (3.8) |
In the following, we compute integrals appearing on the right side of the above inequality
∫120tα((1−t)μk−tμk)dt+∫112tα(tμk−(1−t)μk)dt=2B(12;α+1,μk+1)+1−(12)α+μkα+μk+1−B(α+1,μk+1). | (3.9) |
∫120(1−tα)((1−t)μk−tμk)dt+∫112(1−tα)(tμk−(1−t)μk)dt.=2(1−(12)μk)μk+1+(12)1+μk+αμk+1+α−2B(12;α+1,μk+1)−1−(12)1+μk+αμk+1+α+B(α+1,μk+1). | (3.10) |
∫112tα(1−tα)((1−t)μk−tμk)dt+∫112tα(1−tα)(tμk−(1−t)μk)dt=2B(12;α+1,μk+1)−(12)1+μk+αμk+1+α−2α4−α2˜F1(1+2α,−μk,2(1+α);12)+(12)1+μk+2αμk+1+2α+1−(12)1+μk+αμk+1+α−B(α+1,μk+1)−1−(12)1+μk+2αμk+1+2α+B(2α+1,μk+1). | (3.11) |
Using (3.9), (3.10) and (3.11) in (3.8), we get the required inequality (3.5).
Remark 4. Under the assumption of Theorem 10, one can achieve the following outcomes:
(i) If α=m=1 in (3.5), then the inequality stated in [17,Theorem 11] can be obtained.
(ii) If α=m=1 and c=0 in (3.5), then the inequality stated in [17,Corollary 10] can be obtained.
(iii) If α=m=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (3.5), then Theorem 7 can be obtained.
(iv) If α=m=k=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (3.5), then Theorem 4 can be obtained.
(v) If α=k=1 and ψ=I in (3.5), then the inequality stated in [21,Theorem 8] can be obtained.
(vi) If α=μ=m=k=1 and ψ=I in (3.5), then the inequality stated in [26,Corollary 6] can be obtained.
Corollary 7. Under the assumption of Theorem 10 with c=0 in (3.5), the following inequality holds:
|f(a)+f(b)2−Γk(μ+k)2(b−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(b))+kIμ,ψψ−1(b)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(a))]|≤b−a2[|f′(a)|(2B(12;α+1,μk+1)+1−(12)α+μkα+μk+1−B(α+1,μk+1))+m|f′(bm)|×(2(1−(12)μk)μk+1+(12)1+μk+αμk+1+α−2B(12;α+1,μk+1)−1−(12)1+μk+αμk+1+α+B(α+1,μk+1))]. |
Corollary 8. Under the assumption of Theorem 10 with k=m=1 and c=0 in (3.5), the following inequality holds:
|f(a)+f(b)2−Γ(μ+1)2(b−a)μ[Iμ,ψψ−1(a)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(b))+Iμ,ψψ−1(b)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(a))]|≤b−a2[|f′(a)|(2B(12;α+1,μ+1)+1−(12)α+μα+μ+1−B(α+1,μ+1))+|f′(b)|×(2(1−(12)μ)μ+1+(12)1+μ+αμ+1+α−2B(12;α+1,μ+1)−1−(12)1+μ+αμ+1+α+B(α+1,μ+1))]. |
Corollary 9. Under the assumption of Theorem 10 with ψ=I in (3.5), the following inequality holds:
|f(a)+f(b)2−Γk(μ+k)2(b−a)μk[kIμa+f(b)+kIμb−f(a)]|≤b−a2[|f′(a)|(2B(12;α+1,μk+1)+1−(12)α+μkα+μk+1−B(α+1,μk+1))+m|f′(bm)|(2(1−(12)μk)μk+1+(12)1+μk+αμk+1+α−2B(12;α+1,μk+1)−1−(12)1+μk+αμk+1+α+B(α+1,μk+1))]−c(b−a)3(2B(12;α+1,μk+1)−2α4−α2˜F1(1+2α,−μk,2(1+α);12)+1−(12)μk+αμk+1+α−B(α+1,μk+1)−1−(12)μk+2αμk+1+2α+B(2α+1,μk+1))]. |
For next two results, we need the following lemma.
Lemma 2. [26] Let f:[a,b]→R be a differentiable mapping on (a,b) such that f′∈L[a,b], ψ is positive increasing function having continuous derivative ψ′ on (a,b). If [a,b]⊂Range(ψ), k>0 and m∈(0,1], then the following integral identity for fractional integral holds:
2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]=mb−a4[∫10tμkf′(at2+m(2−t2)b)dt−∫10tμkf′(am(2−t2)+bt2)dt]. | (3.12) |
Theorem 11. Let f:[a,b]→R be a differentiable mapping on (a,b) such that f′∈Ł[a,b]. Also suppose that |f′|q is strongly (α,m)-convex function on [a,b] for q≥1, ψ is an increasing and positive monotone function on (a,b], having a continuous derivative ψ′ on (a,b). If [a,b]⊂Range(ψ), k>0 and (α,m)∈(0,1]2, then the following k-fractional integral inequality holds:
|2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a22+1q(μk+1)(μk+2)1q[(21−αk|f′(a)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)αk+μ+k+21−αmk|f′(b)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)(2α(αk+μ+k)−(μ+k)(μ+k)(αk+μ+k))−21−2αcm(b−a)2(μk+1)(μk+2)×(2α(2αk+μ+k)−(αk+μ+k)(kα+μ+k)(2αk+μ+k)))1q+(21−αkm|f′(am2)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)(2α(αk+μ+k)−(μ+k)(μ+k)(αk+μ+k))+21−αk(μk+1)(μk+2)|f′(b)|qαk+μ+k−21−2αcm(μk+1)(μk+2)(b−am2)2(2α(2αk+μ+k)−(αk+μ+k)(kα+μ+k)(2αk+μ+k)))1q], | (3.13) |
with μ>0.
Proof. Applying Lemma 2 and strongly (α,m)-convexity of |f′|, (for q=1), we have
|2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a4[∫10|tμkf′(at2+m(2−t2)b)|dt+∫10|tμkf′(am(2−t2)+bt2)dt|]≤mb−a4[(|f′(a)|+|f′(b)|2α)∫10tμk+αdt+m(|f′(b)|+|f′(am2)|)2α∫10(2α−tα)tμkdt−cm((b−a)2+(b−am2)2)22α∫10tμk+α(2α−tα)dt]≤mb−a4[k[|f′(a)|+|f′(b)|]2α(μ+αk+k)+mk[2α(αk+μ+k)−(μ+k)](μ+k)(αk+μ+k)×(|f′(b)|+|f′(am2)|)−cmk[2α(2αk+μ+k)−(αk+μ+k)]22α(αk+μ+k)(2αk+μ+k)((b−a)2+(b−am2)2)]. |
Now for q>1, we proceed as follows: From Lemma 2 and using power mean inequality, we get
|2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a4(∫10tμkdt)1−1q[(∫10tμk|f′(at2+m(2−t2)b)|qdt)1q+(∫10tμk|f′(am(2−t2)+bt2)|qdt)1q]≤mb−a4(μk+1)1p[(|f′(a)|q2α∫10tα+μkdt+m|f′(b)|q2α∫10(2α−tα)tμkdt−cm(b−a)222α∫10(2α−tα)tμk+αdt)1q+(m|f′(am2)|2α∫10(2α−tα)tμkdt+|f′(b)|q2α∫10tα+μkdt−cm(b−am2)222α∫10(2α−tα)tμk+αdt)1q]≤mb−a4(μk+1)1p[(k|f′(a)|q2α(αk+μ+k)+mk|f′(b)|q[2α(αk+μ+k)−(μ+k)]2α(μ+k)(αk+μ+k)−cmk(b−a)2[2α(2αk+μ+k)−(αk+μ+k)]22α(kα+μ+k)(2αk+μ+k))1q+(mk|f′(am2)|q[2α(αk+μ+k)−(μ+k)]2α(μ+k)(αk+μ+k)+k|f′(b)|q2α(kα+μ+k)−cmk(b−am2)2[2α(2αk+μ+k)−(αk+μ+k)]22α(kα+μ+k)(2αk+μ+k))1q]≤mb−a22+1q(μk+1)(μk+2)1q[(2k|f′(a)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)2α(αk+μ+k)+21−αmk|f′(b)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)(2α(αk+μ+k)−(μ+k)(μ+k)(αk+μ+k))−21−2αcm(b−a)2(μk+1)(μk+2)(2α(2αk+μ+k)−(αk+μ+k)(kα+μ+k)(2αk+μ+k)))1q+(21−αkm|f′(am2)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)2α(αk+μ+k)−(μ+k)(μ+k)(αk+μ+k)+2k(μk+1)(μk+2)|f′(b)|q2α(αk+μ+k)−2cm(μk+1)(μk+2)(b−am2)222α2α(2αk+μ+k)−(αk+μ+k)(kα+μ+k)(2αk+μ+k))1q]. |
This completes the proof.
Remark 5. Under the assumption of Theorem 11, one can achieve the following outcomes:
(i) If α=m=1 in (3.13), then the inequality stated in [17,Theorem 12] can be obtained.
(ii) If α=k=1 and ψ=I in (3.13), then the inequality stated in [21,Theorem 10] can be obtained.
(iii) If α=k=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (3.13), then the inequality stated in [27,Theorem 2.4] can be obtained.
(iv) If α=m=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (3.13), then the inequality stated in [13,Theorem 3.1] can be obtained.
(v) If α=m=k=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (3.13), then the inequality stated in [9,Theorem 5] can be obtained.
(vi) If α=μ=k=m=q=1 and ψ=I in (3.13), then the inequality stated in [26,Corollary 8] can be obtained.
(vii) If α=μ=k=m=q=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (3.13), then the inequality stated in [28,Theorem 2.2] can be obtained.
Corollary 10. Under the assumption of Theorem 11 with c=0 in (3.13), the following inequality holds:
|2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a22+1q(μk+1)(μk+2)1q[(21−αk|f′(a)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)αk+μ+k+21−αmk|f′(b)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)(2α(αk+μ+k)−(μ+k)(μ+k)(αk+μ+k)))1q+(21−αkm|f′(am2)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)×(2α(αk+μ+k)−(μ+k)(μ+k)(αk+μ+k))+21−αk(μk+1)(μk+2)|f′(b)|qαk+μ+k)1q]. |
Corollary 11. Under the assumption of Theorem 11 with k=1 in (3.13), the following inequality holds:
|2μ−1Γ(μ+1)(mb−a)μ[Iμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμ+1Iμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a22+1q(μ+1)(μ+2)1q[(21−α|f′(a)|q(μ+1)(μ+2)α+μ+1+21−αm|f′(b)|q(μ+1)(μ+2)×(2α(α+μ+1)−(μ+1)(μ+1)(α+μ+1))−21−2αcm(b−a)2(μ+1)(μ+2)(2α(2α+μ+1)−(α+μ+1)(α+μ+1)(2α+μ+1)))1q+(21−αm|f′(am2)|q(μ+1)(μ+2)(2α(α+μ+1)−(μ+1)(μ+1)(α+μ+1))+21−α(μ+1)(μ+2)|f′(b)|qα+μ+1−21−2αcm(μ+1)(μ+2)(b−am2)2(2α(2α+μ+1)−(α+μ+1)(α+μ+1)(2α+μ+1)))1q]. |
Corollary 12. Under the assumption of Theorem 11 with ψ=I in (3.13), the following inequality holds:
|2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ(a+mb2)+f(mb)+mμk+1kIμ(a+mb2m)−f(am)]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a22+1q(μk+1)(μk+2)1q[(21−αk|f′(a)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)αk+μ+k+21−αmk|f′(b)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)×(2α(αk+μ+k)−(μ+k)(μ+k)(αk+μ+k))−21−2αcm(b−a)2(μk+1)(μk+2)(2α(2αk+μ+k)−(αk+μ+k)(kα+μ+k)(2αk+μ+k)))1q+(21−αkm|f′(am2)|q(μk+1)(μk+2)(2α(αk+μ+k)−(μ+k)(μ+k)(αk+μ+k))+21−αk(μk+1)(μk+2)|f′(b)|qαk+μ+k−21−2αcm(μk+1)(μk+2)(b−am2)2(2α(2αk+μ+k)−(αk+μ+k)(kα+μ+k)(2αk+μ+k)))1q]. |
Theorem 12. Let f:I→R be a differentiable mapping on (a,b) with a<b. Also suppose that |f′|q is strongly (α,m)-convex function for q>1, ψ is positive increasing function having continuous derivative ψ′ on (a,b). If [a,b]⊂Range(ψ), k>0 and (α,m)∈(0,1]2, then the following fractional integral inequality holds:
|2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a42−1p(μpk+1)1p[((|f′(a)|(22−αα+1)1q+|f′(b)|(2−αm[2α(1+α)−1]1+α)1q)q−22−2αcm(b−a)2(−1−α+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q+((|f′(am2)|(22−αm[2α(1+α)−1]1+α)1q+(22−αα+1)1q|f′(b)|)q−22−2αcm(b−am2)2(−1(1+α)+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q], | (3.14) |
with μ>0 and 1p+1q=1.
Proof. By applying Lemma 2 and using the property of modulus, we get
|2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a4[∫10|tμkf′(at2+m(2−t2)b)|dt+∫10|tμkf′(am(2−t2)+bt2)|dt]. |
Now applying Hölder's inequality for integrals, we get
|2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a4(μpk+1)1p[(∫10|f′(at2+m(2−t2)b)|qdt)1q+(∫10|f′(am(2−t2)+bt2)|qdt)1q]. |
Using strongly (α,m)-convexity of |f′|q, we get
|2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a4(μpk+1)1p[(|f′(a)|q2α∫10tαdt+m|f′(b)|q2α∫10(2α−tα)dt−cm(b−a)222α∫10tα(2α−tα)dt)1q+(m|f′(am2)|q2α∫10(2α−tα)dt+|f′(b)|q2α∫10tαdt−cm(b−am2)222α∫10tα(2α−tα)dt)1q]=mb−a4(μpk+1)1p[(|f′(a)|q2α(α+1)+m|f′(b)|q[2α(1+α)−1]2α(1+α)−cm(b−a)222α(−1(1+α)+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q+(m|f′(am2)|q[2α(1+α)−1]2α(1+α)+|f′(b)|q2α(α+1)−cm(b−am2)222α(−1−α+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q]≤mb−a42−1p(μpk+1)1p[(22−α|f′(a)|q(α+1)+22−αm|f′(b)|q[2α(1+α)−1]1+α−22−2αcm(b−a)2(−1−α+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q+(22−αm|f′(am2)|q[2α(1+α)−1](1+α)+22−α|f′(b)|qα+1−22−2αcm(b−am2)2(−1−α+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q]≤mb−a42−1p(μpk+1)1p[((|f′(a)|(22−αα+1)1q+|f′(b)|(22−αm[2α(1+α)−1]1+α)1q)q−22−2αcm(b−a)2(−1−α+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q+((|f′(am2)|×(22−αm[2α(1+α)−1]1+α)1q+(22−αα+1)1q|f′(b)|)q−22−2αcm(b−am2)2(−1(1+α)+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q]. |
Here, we have used the fact aq+bq≤(a+b)q, for q>1, a,b≥0. This completes the proof.
Remark 6. Under the assumption of Theorem 12, one can achieve the following outcomes:
(i) If α=m=1 in (3.14), then the inequality stated in [17,Theorem 13] can be obtained.
(ii) If α=k=1 and ψ=I in (3.14), then the inequality stated in [21,Theorem 10] can be obtained.
(iii) If α=k=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (3.14), then the inequality stated in [27,Theorem 2.7] can be obtained.
(iv) If α=m=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (3.14), then the inequality stated in [13,Theorem 2.7] can be obtained.
(v) If α=μ=k=m=1, ψ=I and c=0 in (3.14), then the inequality stated in [29,Theorem 2.4] can be obtained.
Corollary 13. Under the assumption of Theorem 12 with c=0 in 3.14, the following inequality holds:
|2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμk+1kIμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a42−1p(μpk+1)1p[|f′(a)|(22−αα+1)1q+|f′(b)|(22−αm[2α(1+α)−1]1+α)1q+(|f′(am2)|(22−αm[2α(1+α)−1]1+α)1q+(22−αα+1)1q|f′(b)|)]. |
Corollary 14. Under the assumption of Theorem 12 with k=1 in (3.14), the following inequality holds:
|2μ−1Γ(μ+1)(mb−a)μ[Iμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2)+(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(mb))+mμ+1Iμ,ψψ−1(a+mb2m)−(f∘ψ)(ψ−1(am))]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a42−1p(μp+1)1p[((|f′(a)|(22−αα+1)1q+|f′(b)|(2−αm[2α(1+α)−1]1+α)1q)q−22−2αcm(b−a)2(−1−α+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q+((|f′(am2)|(22−αm[2α(1+α)−1]1+α)1q+(22−αα+1)1q|f′(b)|)q−22−2αcm(b−am2)2(−1(1+α)+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q]. |
Corollary 15. Under the assumption of Theorem 12 with ψ=I in (3.14), the following inequality holds:
|2μk−1Γk(μ+k)(mb−a)μk[kIμ(a+mb2)+f(mb)+mμk+1kIμ(a+mb2m)−f(am)]−12[f(a+mb2)+mf(a+mb2m)]|≤mb−a42−1p(μpk+1)1p[((|f′(a)|(22−αα+1)1q+|f′(b)|(22−αm[2α(1+α)−1]1+α)1q)q−22−2αcm(b−a)2×(−1−α+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q+((|f′(am2)|(22−αm[2α(1+α)−1]1+α)1q+(22−αα+1)1q|f′(b)|)q−22−2αcm(b−am2)2(−1(1+α)+2α(1+2α)(1+α)(1+2α)))1q]. |
Some new versions of the Hadamard type inequalities are established for strongly (α,m)-convex functions via the generalized Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals. We have obtained new generalizations as well as proved estimations of such inequalities for strongly (α,m)-convex functions. We conclude that findings of this study give the refinements as well as generalization of several fractional inequalities for convex, strongly convex and strongly m-convex functions. The reader can further deduce inequalities for Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals.
Authors do not have conflict of interest.
[1] |
Egger D, Tripisciano C, Weber V, et al. (2018) Dynamic cultivation of mesenchymal stem cell aggregates. Bioengineering 5: 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering5020048 ![]() |
[2] | Barekzai J, Petry F, Czermak P, et al. (2022) Process design for human mesenchymal stem cell products in Stirred-Tank bioreactors. Cell Culture Engineering and Technology: In appreciation to Professor Mohamed Al-Rubeai. Cham: Springer International Publishing 307-333. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79871-0_10 |
[3] | Barekzai J, Petry F, Zitzmann J, et al. (2020) Bioprocess development for human mesenchymal stem cell therapy products. New Advances on Fermentation Processes. United kingdom: IntechOpen 1-25. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90029 |
[4] |
Phan J, Kumar P, Hao D, et al. (2018) Engineering mesenchymal stem cells to improve their exosome efficacy and yield for cell-free therapy. J Extracell Vesicles 7: 1522236. https://doi.org/10.1080/20013078.2018.1522236 ![]() |
[5] |
Varderidou-Minasian S, Lorenowicz MJ (2020) Mesenchymal stromal/stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles in tissue repair: challenges and opportunities. Theranostics 10: 5979-5997. https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.40122 ![]() |
[6] |
Almeria C, Kreß S, Weber V, et al. (2022) Heterogeneity of mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles is highly impacted by the tissue/cell source and culture conditions. Cell Biosci 12: 51. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13578-022-00786-7 ![]() |
[7] |
Ng CY, Kee LT, Al-Masawa ME, et al. (2022) Scalable production of extracellular vesicles and its therapeutic values: a review. Int J Mol Sci 23: 7986. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23147986 ![]() |
[8] |
Almeida Fuzeta Mde, Bernardes N, Oliveira FD, et al. (2020) Scalable production of human mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles under serum-/xeno-free conditions in a microcarrier-based bioreactor culture system. Front Cell Dev Biol 8: 553444. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2020.553444 ![]() |
[9] |
Cao J, Wang B, Tang T, et al. (2020) Three-dimensional culture of MSCs produces exosomes with improved yield and enhanced therapeutic efficacy for cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury. Stem Cell Res Ther 11: 206. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-020-01719-2 ![]() |
[10] |
Cha JM, Shin EK, Sung JH, et al. (2018) Efficient scalable production of therapeutic microvesicles derived from human mesenchymal stem cells. Sci Rep 8: 1171. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-19211-6 ![]() |
[11] |
Haraszti RA, Miller R, Stoppato M, et al. (2018) Exosomes produced from 3D cultures of MSCs by tangential flow filtration show higher yield and improved activity. Mol Ther 26: 2838-2847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymthe.2018.09.015 ![]() |
[12] |
Fernandes-Platzgummer A, Cunha R, Morini S, et al. (2023) Optimized operation of a controlled stirred tank reactor system for the production of mesenchymal stromal cells and their extracellular vesicles. Biotechnol Bioeng 120: 2742-2755. https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.28449 ![]() |
[13] |
Piffoux M, Nicolás-Boluda A, Mulens-Arias V, et al. (2019) Extracellular vesicles for personalized medicine: The input of physically triggered production, loading and theranostic properties. Adv Drug Deliver Rev 138: 247-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2018.12.009 ![]() |
[14] |
Staubach S, Bauer FN, Tertel T, et al. (2021) Scaled preparation of extracellular vesicles from conditioned media. Adv Drug Deliver Rev 177: 113940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2021.113940 ![]() |
[15] |
Kornilov R, Puhka M, Mannerström B, et al. (2018) Efficient ultrafiltration-based protocol to deplete extracellular vesicles from fetal bovine serum. J Extracell Vesicles 7: 1422674. https://doi.org/10.1080/20013078.2017.1422674 ![]() |
[16] |
Adlerz K, Patel D, Rowley J, et al. (2020) Strategies for scalable manufacturing and translation of MSC-derived extracellular vesicles. Stem Cell Res 48: 101978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scr.2020.101978 ![]() |
[17] |
Leber J, Barekzai J, Blumenstock M, et al. (2017) Microcarrier choice and bead-to-bead transfer for human mesenchymal stem cells in serum-containing and chemically defined media. Process Biochem 59: 255-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2017.03.017 ![]() |
[18] |
Lawson T, Kehoe DE, Schnitzler AC, et al. (2017) Process development for expansion of human mesenchymal stromal cells in a 50L single-use stirred tank bioreactor. Biochem Eng J 120: 49-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2016.11.020 ![]() |
[19] |
Lembong J, Kirian R, Takacs JD, et al. (2020) Bioreactor parameters for microcarrier-based human MSC expansion under xeno-free conditions in a vertical-wheel system. Bioengineering 7: 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering7030073 ![]() |
[20] |
Mizukami A, Fernandes-Platzgummer A, Carmelo JG, et al. (2016) Stirred tank bioreactor culture combined with serum-/xenogeneic-free culture medium enables an efficient expansion of umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem/stromal cells. Biotechnol J 11: 1048-1059. https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.201500532 ![]() |
[21] |
Théry C, Witwer KW, Aikawa E, et al. (2018) Minimal information for studies of extracellular vesicles 2018 (MISEV2018): a position statement of the international society for extracellular vesicles and update of the MISEV2014 guidelines. J Extracell Vesicles 7: 1535750. https://doi.org/10.1080/20013078.2018.1535750 ![]() |
[22] |
Simonsen JL, Rosada C, Serakinci N, et al. (2002) Telomerase expression extends the proliferative life-span and maintains the osteogenic potential of human bone marrow stromal cells. Nat Biotechnol 20: 592-596. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0602-592 ![]() |
[23] |
Petry F, Salzig D (2022) Large-scale production of size-adjusted β-Cell spheroids in a fully controlled stirred-tank reactor. Processes 10: 861. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10050861 ![]() |
[24] |
Zwietering T (1958) Suspending of solid particles in liquid by agitators. Chem Eng Sci 8: 244-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(58)85031-9 ![]() |
[25] | Peter CP (2007) Design of shaken bioreactors for fermentation systems with elevated viscosity and hydromechanical sensibility [PhD thesis]. Aachen: Publication server of RWTH Aachen University. |
[26] | Jaccard N (2015) Development of an image processing method for automated, non-invasive and scale-independent monitoring of adherent cell cultures [PhD thesis]. London: University College London. |
[27] |
Yang Y, Rossi FMV, Putnins EE (2007) Ex vivo expansion of rat bone marrow mesenchymal stromal cells on microcarrier beads in spin culture. Biomaterials 28: 3110-3120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.03.015 ![]() |
[28] |
Salzig D, Leber J, Merkewitz K, et al. (2016) Attachment, growth, and detachment of human mesenchymal stem cells in a chemically defined medium. Stem Cells Int 2016: 5246584. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/5246584 ![]() |
[29] |
Elseberg CL, Leber J, Salzig D, et al. (2012) Microcarrier-based expansion process for hMSCs with high vitality and undifferentiated characteristics. Int J Artif Organs 35: 93-107. https://doi.org/10.5301/ijao.5000077 ![]() |
[30] |
Petry F, Salzig D (2022) The cultivation conditions affect the aggregation and functionality of β-cell lines alone and in coculture with mesenchymal stromal/stem cells. Eng Life Sci 22: 769-783. https://doi.org/10.1002/elsc.202100168 ![]() |
[31] |
Franquesa M, Hoogduijn MJ, Ripoll E, et al. (2014) Update on controls for isolation and quantification methodology of extracellular vesicles derived from adipose tissue mesenchymal stem cells. Front Immunol 5: 525. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2014.00525 ![]() |
[32] |
L Ramos T, Sánchez-Abarca LI, Muntión S, et al. (2016) MSC surface markers (CD44, CD73, and CD90) can identify human MSC-derived extracellular vesicles by conventional flow cytometry. Cell Commun Signaling 14: 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12964-015-0124-8 ![]() |
[33] |
Wang J, Bonacquisti EE, Brown AD, et al. (2020) Boosting the biogenesis and secretion of mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes. Cells 9: 660. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells9030660 ![]() |
[34] |
Grangier A, Branchu J, Volatron J, et al. (2021) Technological advances towards extracellular vesicles mass production. Adv Drug Delivery Rev 176: 113843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2021.113843 ![]() |
[35] |
PPinto A, Marangon I, Méreaux J, et al. (2021) Immune reprogramming precision photodynamic therapy of peritoneal metastasis by scalable stem-cell-derived extracellular vesicles. ACS Nano 15: 3251-3263. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.0c09938 ![]() |
[36] |
Patel DB, Santoro M, Born LJ, et al. (2018) Towards rationally designed biomanufacturing of therapeutic extracellular vesicles: impact of the bioproduction microenvironment. Biotechnol Adv 36: 2051-2059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2018.09.001 ![]() |
[37] |
Grangier A, Wilhelm C, Gazeau F, et al. (2020) High yield and scalable EV production from suspension cells triggered by turbulence in a bioreactor. Cytotherapy 22: 50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcyt.2020.03.061 ![]() |
[38] |
Tertel T, Schoppet M, Stambouli O, et al. (2022) Imaging flow cytometry challenges the usefulness of classically used extracellular vesicle labeling dyes and qualifies the novel dye Exoria for the labeling of mesenchymal stromal cell-extracellular vesicle preparations. Cytotherapy 24: 619-628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcyt.2022.02.003 ![]() |
[39] |
Murphy DE, de Jong OG, Brouwer M, et al. (2019) Extracellular vesicle-based therapeutics: natural versus engineered targeting and trafficking. Exp Mol Med 51: 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s12276-019-0223-5 ![]() |
[40] |
Skovronova R, Grange C, Dimuccio V, et al. (2021) Surface marker expression in small and medium/large mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicles in naive or apoptotic condition using orthogonal techniques. Cells 10: 2948. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells10112948 ![]() |
[41] |
Yuan X, Sun L, Jeske R, et al. (2022) Engineering extracellular vesicles by three-dimensional dynamic culture of human mesenchymal stem cells. J Extracell Vesicles 11: e12235. https://doi.org/10.1002/jev2.12235 ![]() |
[42] |
Zhang Y, Chopp M, Zhang ZG, et al. (2017) Systemic administration of cell-free exosomes generated by human bone marrow derived mesenchymal stem cells cultured under 2D and 3D conditions improves functional recovery in rats after traumatic brain injury. Neurochem Int 111: 69-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuint.2016.08.003 ![]() |
[43] |
Munshi A, Mehic J, Creskey M, et al. (2019) A comprehensive proteomics profiling identifies NRP1 as a novel identity marker of human bone marrow mesenchymal stromal cell-derived small extracellular vesicles. Stem Cell Res Ther 10: 401. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-019-1516-2 ![]() |
[44] |
Sierra-Parraga JM, Merino A, Eijken M, et al. (2020) Reparative effect of mesenchymal stromal cells on endothelial cells after hypoxic and inflammatory injury. Stem Cell Res Ther 11: 352. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-020-01869-3 ![]() |
[45] |
Priglinger E, Strasser J, Buchroithner B, et al. (2021) Comprehensive label-free characterization of extracellular vesicles and their surface proteins. J Extracell Vesicles : e12156. https://doi.org/10.1002/jev2.12156 ![]() |
[46] |
Cabral J, Ryan AE, Griffin MD, et al. (2018) Extracellular vesicles as modulators of wound healing. Adv Drug Delivery Rev 129: 394-406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2018.01.018 ![]() |
[47] |
Zhang J, Guan J, Niu X, et al. (2015) Exosomes released from human induced pluripotent stem cells-derived MSCs facilitate cutaneous wound healing by promoting collagen synthesis and angiogenesis. J Transl Med 13: 49. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-015-0417-0 ![]() |
[48] |
Patel DB, Luthers CR, Lerman MJ, et al. (2019) Enhanced extracellular vesicle production and ethanol-mediated vascularization bioactivity via a 3D-printed scaffold-perfusion bioreactor system. Acta Biomater 95: 236-244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2018.11.024 ![]() |
[49] |
Amarnath S, Foley JE, Farthing DE, et al. (2015) Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells harness purinergenic signaling to tolerize human Th1 cells in vivo. Stem Cells 33: 1200-1212. https://doi.org/10.1002/stem.1934 ![]() |
[50] |
Teo KYW, Zhang S, Loh JT, et al. (2023) Mesenchymal stromal cell exosomes mediate M2-like macrophage polarization through CD73/Ecto-5′-nucleotidase activity. Pharmaceutics 15: 1489. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics15051489 ![]() |
[51] |
Turiello R, Capone M, Morretta E, et al. (2022) Exosomal CD73 from serum of patients with melanoma suppresses lymphocyte functions and is associated with therapy resistance to anti-PD-1 agents. J Immunother Cancer 10: e004043. https://doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2021-004043 ![]() |
[52] |
Hettich BF, Ben-Yehuda Greenwald M, Werner S, et al. (2020) Exosomes for wound healing: purification optimization and identification of bioactive components. Adv Sci 7: 2002596. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202002596 ![]() |
[53] |
Bauer FN, Tertel T, Stambouli O, et al. (2023) CD73 activity of mesenchymal stromal cell-derived extracellular vesicle preparations is detergent-resistant and does not correlate with immunomodulatory capabilities. Cytotherapy 25: 138-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcyt.2022.09.006 ![]() |
[54] |
Nguyen VVT, Witwer KW, Verhaar MC, et al. (2020) Functional assays to assess the therapeutic potential of extracellular vesicles. J Extracell Vesicles 10: e12033. https://doi.org/10.1002/jev2.12033 ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |